ARJUN DAS Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The curse of delays in the administration of criminal justice -some times for more than a decade or two -which had straddled the State of Bihar, is epitomized by this set of twenty -eight criminal writ jurisdiction cases. Indeed, facts in some of the cases need not like those of a current prosecution but as a chronicle of old history. All the petitioners herein invoke the constitutional right of speedy public trial under Article 21 and allege the most glaring infraction thereof. The legal issue is identical and the relevant facts focussed on gross delays bear the closest similarity. Learned counsel not only agreed but prayed that all these cases be disposed of by a common judgment.

(2.) The representative matrix of facts may be taken from Cr. W. J. C. No. 191 of 1986 and the briefest synopsis of others would suffice because gross and fatal delay herein is writ large on the face of impugned proceedings, some of which have come close to two decades. In Cr. W. J. C. No. 191 of 1986 the genesis of the crime goes back to nearly 19 years. On the basis of the statement of one Neyamat Hussain, dated the 20th of July, 1968, Kotwali (Patna) P. S. Case No. 111, dated 20 -7 -1968, was instituted against the petitioner and others under Sec. 385 of the Indian Penal Code. It is unnecessary to recount the facts therein, but the broad allegation was that the petitioner along with another had snatched the wrist watch of the first informant, whilst the alleged co -accused had taken Rs. 40/ - from the cash box. It would seem that the investigation for this simple occurrence took well nigh 6 years and it was not till the 30th of April, 1974 that the charge -sheet against the petitioner and two others was submitted. This came up for consideration by the learned Magistrate nearly a year and 7 months thereafter on the 29th November, 1975, on which date cognizance was taken. Three more years had to pass before the petitioner was committed to the Court of Session by the Chief Judicial Magistrate on the 3rd of July, 1978. Yet again it was not till eight years later that on the 17th of January, 1986, the charge came to be framed against the petitioner and his co -accused. In this long travail of nearly 19 years, one of the co -accused Anand Kumar Lal died and a petition was filed on the 21st of March, 1986 intimating the said fact. The Court called a report from the concerned Police Station regarding the death of the accused. It is averred that since then the case is pending before the learned Assistant Session Judge No, III at Patna and the prosecution has not chosen to put a single witness in the box so far despite the passage of nearly two decades. It has been categorically averred on behalf of the petitioner that barring a marginal absence way back in 1976 the petitioner has continuously remained present and corporated in the trial and the horrendous delay of 18 years has not in the least been contributed by any default on his part.

(3.) Aggrieved by the protracted prosecution against him for well nigh 19 years and to which as yet no end was in sight, the present writ petition has been filed.